Search results for 'tag:Dates tag:Uncountable nouns' matching tags 'Dates' and 'Uncountable nouns'

article

Anonymous — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:46:47 GMT

Hi,
I have trouble knowign whether I should put articles for situations like below or not.

1. Classroom management styles can be characterized along two dimensions: type (why not 'the type'??) of control ... and degreee (the degree OK??) of involvement ...
I feel the word 'degree' is OK as uncountable but the word 'type' doesn't look to be a candidate for an uncountable noun (if I am not mistaken).

2. There are two types of faces: optimistic face (an/the optimistic face OK??) and pessmistic face (a/the pessimistic face OK??).

3. There are the two ways available: right way (the right way OK??) and wrong way (the wrong way OK??)

Re: Is this sentence correct

Mr Wordy — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 19:43:19 GMT

wholegrain
When we use a singular noun to refer to many instances of the thing we are referring to (or to use for the entire class of such things), it may be uncountable and countable still depending on the definition we use of the word in question?

I'm not sure if you're asking whether the same noun that refers to many instances or a general class can be either countable or uncountable, or whether you're talking about different nouns. In the latter case yes. For example, "traffic" is uncountable; "flock" (of birds) is countable. In the former case, potentially also yes, but examples are harder to think of. "Population" is the best candidate I can come up with right now.

wholegrain
For instance man would be uncountable as it may refer to mankind, therefore it doesn't take any article.

That's correct. If "man" (often "Man") means "mankind" then it is uncountable and does not take an article.

wholegrain
However, in the case of church or state, they always take an article, because of their definition: their definitions making them countable and not uncountable?

"church" meaning the building is countable and takes an article ("I live opposite a church"). "church" can be uncountable, with no article, in the sense I illustrated before.

"state" is normally countable.

"the state" and "the church" (sometimes capitalised as "the State" or "the Church") can also be used in the abstract sense of "the institution". For example:

They can do this because the State decrees it so.

This is a grey area to me in terms as far as terminology is concerned. I'm not sure if "State" here would be classed as a countable noun, or whether it falls outside the countable/uncountable noun classification system.

Re: NOUN

Believer — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:55:17 GMT

Thank you, Avangi.

In my previous post, I should have used third-person verb tenses, 'sounds' and 'gives' -- proper subject-verb agreement wasn't made due to my carelessness.

Going back to your request for examples of cases where I would feel something in quotes could not be used with an indefinite article becauss of its semantic meaning, I would have say that I can't think of any at this point in time.

Do you think anything in quotes is good a candidate as a typical (known-to-be??) uncountable noun?

Thank you.

NOUN

Believer — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:12:14 GMT

Hi,

It has been known to me that a gerund can function as a noun and should or likely to be treated more as an uncountable noun than a countable noun.

Mixing of sugar and flour makes this dough ...

If you want to be specific, I think you could write:

The mixing of sugar and flour makes this dough ...

If you want to indicate the mixing being an instance of it or an example of it, you could write (I think) like this:

A mixing of sugar and flour makes this dough ...

It could be more clear if you write this though (but the above example seems to be correct grammatically too):

An instance of sugar and flour makes this dough ...

It has been to me that a quoted content (I may be wrong but what I call a quoted content is one that has quotation marks around it, whether or not they are done to quote someone's words or to highlight a word/words) can be treated an uncountble noun too.

"-ing" is not needed in your sentence. -- Just the mention of a case to highlight, I think.

The "-ing" is not needed in your sentence. -- Not just mentioning but specificallymentioning, I think.

A "-ing" is not needed in your sentence. -- An example of "-ing" use or an instance of "-ing" use, but this is what gives me trouble. I think whether a word in quotation marks can accommodate an indefinite article is predicated on whether its semantic meaning can embrace it.

So, I think I would be able to say, depending on words, some words that are in quotation marks can accommodate its having an indefinite article, whereas some words that are in quotation marks can't accommodate the use because its semantic meaning and how it is used in sentences make it awkward at best if not wrong to have an indefinite article. Sounds plausible?

Sorry for a long post.

Re: one slash...

Pter — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 03:09:21 GMT

Thanks Kooyeen. I know it is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG to use "software" as a countable noun. We can certainly find a lot of reasons why "software" should be uncountable. However, I just hate I have to say "a piece of software" or a "software package" every time when I talk about software. You don't say "a piece of stuff", "a stuff package" or anything similar. "A piece of silverware" is also rare if the number of hits from Google can be considered a useful reference.

Software is uncountable, but "software updates" are countable. It's insane. A software update is part of the original and contains fewer lines of code than the complete program. A part of an uncountable noun is countable!

I just wish that someone invent a word that is countable and means "a piece of software" or change the usage of software to "[ C ] and [ U ]"!

Another thing I'd wish to do, if I had any authority over the English language, is to abolish once and for all the whole notion of having countable and uncountable nouns!

EDIT:

I believe most words ending with -ware are most often used collectively. It is rather rare to refer to a single piece of whatever-ware. Software is an exception and I have already mentioned in my previous post that the usage of the word "software" has changed (or expanded) since its inception. It was originally a vague concept and using it as as an uncountable noun WAS certainly reasonable. However, in current usage, "software" is most often used to refer to concrete items, the individual software packages. Yet, "software packages" seems to either suggest a collection of multiple software items (e.g. Microsoft Office suite) or there is some sort of "packaging".

Re: what could come after a preposition?

CalifJim — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:27:38 GMT

The only thing that can come after a preposition to form a prepositional phrase is a noun phrase, usually a noun accompanied by its preceding determiner and perhaps an adjective. A relative clause may be added. The noun itself may be a gerund.

If the element after the candidate for a preposition looks like it's not a noun, then either of these holds:

a. The preposition candidate is not a preposition, but perhaps an adverb or conjunction.
b. The structure after the preposition candidate actually is a noun phrase.

Both of your examples are in the category labeled b.

In your first example bad should be viewed as an adjective used as a noun, 'promoted' to a noun because of the elision of situation or its equivalent, one.

The situation can be seen as a bad situation.
The situation can be seen as a bad one.

In your second example, bad and good are simply abstract uncountable nouns meaning that which is bad and that which is good, respectively.

CJ

Re: some rule about using articles

Kooyeen — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 16:21:22 GMT

Hi,
very interesting... I wouldn't say you always have to add the article. But I'm not sure, so it would be interesting to know if in a sentence like...
Candidates must have (a) good knowledge of Physics
the article can be left out. If so, then you can say that the article can be added when uncountable nouns are used together with adjectives or other information, but it is not necessary.

thinking in types of them

Believer — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 10:30:36 GMT

Hi,

I am thinking of the following uncountable nouns in terms of their types as seem to note in the third sentences of each set of question sentences and can you check all the following are possible? As to all three cases, the words 'terror', 'mercy' and 'disaster' seem to be suitable candidates for this relatively easy transformation. Sorry if I ask too many questions on articles. I am just trying to understand.

1. Kick them with terror.

Kick them with great terror.

Kick them with a great terror. (thinking in terms of a type of great terror)

2. Have mercy in me.

Have great mercy in me.

Have a great mercy in me. (again, thinking in terms of a type of mercy)

3. Bring disaster on this place.

Bring great disaster on this place.

Bring a great disaster on this place. (again, thinking in terms of a type of disaster)

Help me to understand.

Believer — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:21:01 GMT

Hi,

In the post titled "Uncountable noun that is preceded by the "a", I think Mister M noted, as part of his response, some uncountable nouns like 'attendance' or 'support' ,which are mentioned by victorycounty, don't necessarily become countable and it is often the speaker's conception that causes the ball to roll.

Mr. M went on to say this:

And in your a) and b), as I said above, in many cases the speaker has the options:

high attendance or a high attendance

poor attendance or a poor attendance

great support or a great support

OK, I can buy that for the word 'attendance', which is a variable noun (I think), Mr. M's argument for the speaker's conception to play the ball makes sense to me but for the uncountable noun, his argument seems to lose its strength, at least in my mind.

My question:

Can Mr. M's argument hold the water for the uncountable words like 'support' and 'coverage' and if that is so, then can I write like this depending on how I visulize the level of support or coverage eventhough there is no prior- or post-precedence or nothing related to those nouns in my writing?

There was a great support for the candidate from Seoul.

There was great support for the candidate from Seoul.

It was a superb coverage of that special event.

It was superb coverage of that special event.

Hope my question makes good sence.

not simple but yet important

Believer — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 06:49:46 GMT

Hi,

Maybe I really shouldn't delve too deeply into the topic of changing an uncountable noun into a countable noun but since I see them every so often in print, I want to ask you.

A person or two (think one person is Yankee) seem to have said that I have to find the words or things that can be categorized by types or degree and when you see an uncountable noun with an indefinite article, it is in fact pointing to a type or a particular instance of that thing or word.

Yankee gave these setence for me to think about:

Their was a love so deep that ...

I doubt that I'll ever again experience a darkness as profound as the darkness of that night.

Great but sometimes I do encounter words or things that do not seem to be susceptible to categorization by degree or in types, like the ones below. I want to say that I am not sure they are correct. I kind of made them up.

A democritization of a third-world nation is something to be highly praised.

A modernization of their equipment is an effort that is highly backed by the populace.

The words democritization and modernization seem to be unlikely candidates for this type of categorization that will enable them to make the transition noted. What I have done? Did I categorize them into types or mentioned specific types of them? I am not sure I did. Do you have some tips for me to see better of the things involved here?